Provisional Drogereit pdf

(p. 355) The second charter is similarly written in thick, large script, but here there is
not the sense of space there is in Anc. Ch. III, 21. The more angular, narrower letters
are close together, which gives rise to a heavy and compact handwriting style. This
script has regularity but is less clear. The descenders are short and not quite so
pointed. The obvious difference between the soft writing of the first charter and the
hard writing of the second so clearly points towards different scribes, that any further
detailing of this is superfluous. However, the same pictorial invocation and the way in
which the Oscytel is written, give evidence to a mutual influence.
With this scribe we still encounter the raised a and for the first time again the
character resembling the double-c. The r has only a short descender.
Charter manuscripts have been found which are stylistically related to this script, and
in consideration of this we will refer to the scribe as Eadred B 70 .
Scribe Eadgar A (p. 355)
Charters: Anc. Ch.III, 22; 23 71 ; 24; 25; Anglo-Saxon Mss. III, 30 72 and Mss.
II, Westminster 6 73.
This script, which ‘of all scripts of that time is of special significance 74 , is stark and
wooden. The small, square and thick rump letters connect to each other like links of a
chain, from which only the tall, stiff and equally thick ascenders and descenders stand
out. However, as these do not fill the wide line spacing, they do not disturb the
impression of interlinked letter chains.
70
We name the scribe Eadred B, as the first charter associated with his style was written still during the
reign of Eadred (951; see below).
71 This is the charter containing the second hand which writes the Caroline minuscule; at the same time
this is the first example of this alphabet in England (Hessel, loc sit, P 18). The second starts at the
correct distance after the Anglo-Saxon boundary clause; as it has significantly reduced descenders and
ascenders there remains some free space below. Yet this is simultaneous proof that the boundary clause
was not omitted and inserted at a later date, but rather was written at the same time.
72 Here we have a later addition to the endorsement, to which we would like to draw attention, as the
writing resembles that of the supposed Dunstan Charter of 949 (Anglo-Sax. Mss. I, 15). Through this
we would also have to add this supposed original to the “Canterbury Fabrications” mentioned by W.
H. Stevenson. (See W, H, Stevenson, Trinoda Necessitas in E. H. R. XXIX, 692, n. 18. This essay lists
a series of suspect charters in the footnotes; on p. 695 it mentions some characteristics of the outer and
inner structure that are very typical of the charters written before the 10 th Century; see p. 341 and p.
358).
73 This charter is copied, obviously imitating the hand of Eadgar A; see pictorial invocation, the A at
start of the text, the majuscule writing of the name Eadgar, the His and This, Anno and Ego; also the Q
and r are copied.
74 Hessel. loc sit, p. 18.
355